tv [untitled] July 26, 2014 5:00am-5:31am PDT
meet, madam clerk will you please call the role. >> avalos not present, breed present, campos, present, chiu present; cohen present; farrell present; kim present; mar present; tang present; wiener present; yee present. you have a quorum. >> supervisor avalos has been asked to be excused. with that, could we all rise for the pledge of allegiance? >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible with
liberty and justice for all. could i have a motion the approve june 17 minutes? second by supervisor yee without objection those meeting minutes are approved. are in any communications. >> i have one. concurrence of continuation of revised local emergency relaeting to the rim fire, the status on national forest fire was omitted from the board agenda today and will be considered on the imperative agenda. it's important to approve it today as is current declaration expires tomorrow. >> with that, let's go through the consent agenda. >> items 1 through 17 are considered routine unless a member objects. >> colleagues, would anyone like to sever any of these items.
role call vote? >> on items 1 through 17. kim i; mar i; tang i, wiener i, breed i, campos i, chiu i, cohen i, farrell i. there are ten is. >> those ordinances are passed. next item. >> item 18 is the annual budget and appropriation ordinance to appropriate all estimated receipts and expenditures. >> item #19d. 19. >> [inaudible]. >> supervisor breed. okay. can we take these two items, same house same call?
without objection, these ordinances are finally passed. items 20 through 22. >> items 20 through 22 are ordinances associated with the schlage lock project between the city and visitation development. item 21 amends the planning code to provide for use controls and amends the zoning map. and item 22 amends the general plan to implement the visitation valley schlage log special use district. >> same house same call? without objections these ordinances are finally passed. item 23. >> this is to amend the charter of san francisco to provide retiree benefits to retirees of the city and county. >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much, mr. president. good afternoon everyone. good afternoon colleagues. this proposed charter amendment
is narrowly crafted to transition employees who were formally employed by the redevelopment agency. as many of you have known, in 2002 we were all reeling from the governor's decision to abolish the redevelopment agencies across the state. and we've been working on finding redevelopment tax increment. however, just like many of these projects, including the schlage lock project, the board is approving today that we just approved the employees of the agency have spent a number of years in limbo. the biggest [inaudible] making a complete transition to the city as they cannot count their previous years of service in the redevelopment agency towards their vesting for their retiree healthcare benefits.
now, many of these employees are in their mid career or close to requirement so the possibility of having to start over and accrue additional 20 years is very problematic. the charter amendment allows employees of the former redevelopment agency to count their years of service at the redevelopment agency for purposes of retiree healthcare benefits if they become city employees by march of 2015. this charter amendment only impacts retiree healthcare and not any other section of the charter related to retirement benefits, which is why the retirement board has elected not to hear or cost this measure out. this also does not guarantee that every employee at the successor agency will have a position here within the city and county government. it merely allows employees who were negatively impacted by the disillusion ment of the
redevelopment agency to if they become city employees of march of 2015. we've worked hard with city agencies, want to acknowledge the city attorney's office, mickey callahan as well as health service system to make sure that we are not allowing any of these employees to double dip and that we are targeting the employees that truly felt the impacts of the state's dissolution. we've excluded employees who have left the agency prior to the dissolution voluntarily, two, those that are collecting pemca or other retiree benefits, three, those that have vested from previous years
of service, and four, established a precise date by which any employee who qualifies must be employed by the city of march 2015 so this is not an open ended opg. ed option. we've made several amendments at the rules committee, two specifically, to address several questions and requests that were made by the department. the charter amendment that is before you today has the support of a human resource director, as well as two unions also bringing forth this measure that represent employees that were impacted by the re-- by the dissolutionments of the redevelopment agency. that's local 21 and siu local 10 to 1. this is a very fair measure that helps employees in a very
difficult situation over the past few years. this is the only option that we have to ensure that these employees get credit for their years served so i ask that you support this measure. >> thank you supervisor. and unless there are any other comments let's take a role call vote on this charter amendment. >> item 23, kim i, mar i, tang i, wiener i, yee i, breed i, campos i, chew i, cohen i, farrell i. there are 10 is. >> this charter amendment is submitted. >> thank you. >> could you call item 24. >> this was referred without recommendation from the rules committee, charter amendment, second draft to amend the charter of san francisco to
adjust the required annual appropriation from the general fund to the transportation fund annually to reflect increases in the population of san francisco subject to discontinuation by the mayor if a new general tax on vehicles is enacted by the san francisco voters, all at an election to be held on november 24, 2014. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you for entertaining this item. colleagues, this charter amendment will help us to address the huge challenges we have around the future of transportation in san francisco. our -- and it will do so by, in part, tying the municipal transportation agency baseline funding to population growth in san francisco. we are living in a growing city, san francisco's population has grown by 85,000 people since 2003. it is anticipated to grow by
another 150,000 people by 2040. our transportation system has not kept up. muni is struggling in a very serious way. the agency does not have enough vehicles, many vehicles are old and not reliable, we have too many service disruptions in the system. muni has $2.2 billion in deferred maintenance. we need to be very, very serious about funding this system. i participated in mayor's transportation 2030 task force which made some solid recommendations. the bond we placed on the ballot last week is very important, another important part is the vehicle license fee, which we were going to go to the ballot on this coming november. that was delayed until 2016. as a result, we have several
years without funding that the mta assumed and that will have a direct impact on our ability to move forward in terms of getting this system, shoring it up, making it more reliable, significantly expanding its capacity so it's not overcrowded as it is today. we don't have two years to wait. we need to be addressing muni's severe needs now. this measure will take the mta's baseline and will tie it to population growth in san francisco. in the first year it will reflect the ten years of population growth we've seen over the last decade and thereafter it will increase on an annual basis by population growth. i, in committee, did amend the measure to provide that after two years if the vlf passes the mayor will have the authority to cancel this measure and the
vlf will pick up where it off. the measure has garnered strong support in the transportation advocacy community, endorsed by the transit riders union, sierra club, walk sf and the san francisco bike coalition. i also want to thank my legislative mr. powers for his work on the measure and everyone else who had input into it. colleagues, i ask for your support. >> supervisor tang. >> thank you. i will just reiterate a couple comments i made in committee and really want to again, acknowledge supervisor wiener for all his work on public transportation in san francisco. i'm going to have to vote against this measure today, mostly because of the immediate -- next fiscal year $22 million hit to our general fund and we just finished our budget conversations here where we had many trade off conversations.
i agree with the intent of this measure, i agree we need to put more money into our public transportation system, that we've severely been lacking and why we've as a board have signed on to support a general obligation fund as a measure for votes. rs. i'm concerned people will be confused this november and i want to work as hard as i can to make sure the general obligation bond is successful this november. i have the issue with the $22 million hit to the general fund, a little bit with the way the measure and formula is structured, but don't disagree we need to put more resources to our public transportation system. thank you supervisor wiener. >> any additional conversation? role call vote. >> on item 24, kim i, mar no,
tang no, wiener i, yee no, breed i, campos i, chiu i, cohen i, farrell no. there are six is and four nos. >> this charter amendment is submitted. item 25. >> item 25 is an ordinance to amend the administrative code to authorize the department of public health to enter into operating leases for equipment. >> role call vote. >> on item 25, supervisor kim i, mar i, tang i, wiener i, yee i, breed i, campos i, chiu i,
cohen i, farrell i. there are 10 is. >> this ordinance is passed. next item. >> item 26 is the ordinance to reappropriate 23 million if waste water revenue bonds placing 8.47 million on reserve and to maintain [inaudible]. >> can we do same house same call? without objection this ordinance is passed on first reading. item 27. >> item 27 is ordinance to retroactively appropriate approximately 653,000 in the fire department surplus expenditures in fiscal year 2013 through 14 #14. >> same house same call. this ordinance is passed on if first reading. next item.
>> [inaudible] approximately 76,000 in the department of emergency management surplus expenditure to support increase expenditures in fiscal year 2013 through 14. >> same house same call. this ordinance is passed first reading. >> number 29 is a resolution to amend 265-13 to revise the scope of work for an emergency contract from six to five digesters at southeast water control plant and i crease the contract not to exceed amount to approximately 14.45 million. >> same house, same call. resolution is adopted. >> item 30 is resolution to [inaudible] execute amendment number 4 to an agreement with urs corporation to increase the length of the agreement until may 24, 2019, a duration of 15 years and nine months and increase the estimated cumulative krablth amount to [inaudible] improvement program for the [inaudible] replacement
project. >> same house same call. this resolution is adopted. >> item 31 is a resolution to authorize the port to accept a gift of art referred to as the james r herman valued at 250,000 for display at pier 27. >> same house same call. this resolution's adopted. next item. >> item 32 is a resolution to authorize the filing of applications for funding assigned to the metropolitan transportation commission and authorize the department of public works to accept and eks pend approximately 1.3 million in awarded grant funds. >> same house same call. this resolution adopted. >> item 33 is a resolution to authorize real property [inaudible] not to exceed amount of 2.79 million. >> same house same call. this resolution's adopted. >> item 34 is a resolution to
approve the jurisdictional transfer for property commonly known as the san francisco reservoir under the [inaudible] and approving the transfer price of 9.9 million. >> supervisor farrell. >> thank you president chiu and thank you colleagues for hearing this item today. many ways, very surreal after all this time, they're actually voting on the reservoir and what's going to be a transformative project, not only for surrounding neighborhoods but city of san francisco. when i first came into office in 2011 we started working with our public utilities commission around the reservoir and what it would look like to repurpose the site. i want to [inaudible] both of their hard work on this matter and, you know, as we continue to talk about open space here in the city of san francisco as we continue to increase our density i'm such a huge
believer that in every single neighborhood across our city we need to be proactive creating new forms of open space and this is simply a once in a lifetime opportunity to create a brand new 4.5 acre park in one of the densest parks of san francisco. this partnership we have formed over the last three years is really in four largest neighborhood organizations, many of whom are in attendance today with their stickers and have been with us every step along the road. these neighborhood organizations have stepped up and their leadership has stepped up and this project would not be possible without them. the working group helped build support with over 40 organizations total that have been involved in this effort and helped raise the funds necessary to bid and maintain the park into perpetuity. we're going to be able to left leverage the open space funds,
but with the across our city to help build the park and to maintain it into the future. the site itself is located just on the corner of hyde and bake street in the russian hill area also bounded by which he is nut and larkin. it's been under the jurisdiction of our public utilities commission, and has been concrete and chain link ever since this project has become very personal not because of just the time we've spent with it, but growing up here in san francisco i have fond memories playing as a child around the reservoir, dropping the footballs around the reservoir and picking them up and now children are going to have the opportunity to play on grass and fields and it'll be such an amazing difference.
since the 80s the manning department continue the dez nation of open space in our general plan. obviously the benefits of open space across our city are undeniable. it simply increases our quality of life like none other. great cities have great parks and we have the ability now today to act of that inventory. people have called it the mission delores park of the north. whatever we want to call it, it's likely going to be the francisco park, but this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to transform a neighborhood. the three year collaboration with the francisco park working group has not only included the neighbors, but again, all the citywide organizations that have come to support this project and i want to list them. the immediate neighborhood groups that have formed this
include the aquatic park neighbors, russian hill improvement association. i want to thank mayor ed lee for his support all along the way in this process and my cosponsors. first of all david chiu who i have had the opportunity to share governance over russian hill with and we share a board there and he's been a lead cosponsor along the way. supervisors davis campos, london breed, katy tang, wiener and yee. i want to thank the members of the budget and finance committee which passed this ewe than mousely. the san francisco parks alliance, san francisco beautiful, sierra club, omega boys club, china town ymca, san francisco league conservation voters, middle poke neighborhood association, china town development center, san francisco tomorrow, galileo high school which sits next door and we'll have amazing
opportunities to many other organizations. i also want to take an opportunity to thank so many people who have been involved in this project from the city perspective. first of all, again, i mentioned to our public utilities commission thank you for all of your efforts. i want to thank our rec and park department. thank you for your leadership, phil, stacy bradley, your team has been amazing throughout the process. to the working group from san francisco reservoir, i want to thank everyone involved. leslie, your support and leadership has been incredible. i want to thank our city's office, who spent a lot of time with our puc and rec and park
departments, as well as in particular from my staff, margo kelly whose support has been unbelievable and we would not be here without her efforts over the past few years. again, from my perspective, certainly someone who grew up using this area, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity that i don't think we can pass up. i'm so proud of where we've come over the last three-and-a-half years. it's's been a labor of love for everyone involved and this is such an opportunity for our neighborhoods and san francisco, and i ask for your support. >> thank you supervisor farrell. supervisor kim. >> thank you. wanted to talk a little bit about my thought process around this conditional jurisdiction transfer which is i have really spent the last month-and-a-half really debating about. a lot of thinking around the open space acquisition funds, but i wanted to call out today, in the life of the fund i'm
concerned we haven't spent any of the funds in high needs areas. i represent one of those districts. i have if fewest and smallest parks along with district three. our district has 0.17 acres of open space per residents. 0.17 acres of open space per resident and in comparison with the district with the most open space that's district two, 25 acres per resident. for me, i know that last year i supported using the open space acquisition fund for the square. the neighbors really did a lot of work and a lot of neighborhood planning and fund raising to leverage those funds to acquire that site and today, begun e i will be supporting the francisco reservoir for the same reasons i supported it last year. i want to commend supervisor farrell. clearly three years of work has gone into this.
a lot of neighborhood groups, a lot of coalition building. it's great to have another large new park for san francisco and it'll clearly serve galileo high school, as you mentioned, as well as other communities, but going forward i really hope that we, as a city, take a hard, strong look at making sure we're ensuring equity with the remaining funds. i hope that the next vote that i take will be for a high needs area, particularly of course in district 6 or 3 and of course, in the districts that are absorbing growth, which includes the southeast sector. i wanted to name some of the concerns i have on the future ongoing use of the funds, but i want to recognize the work that's gone into putting francisco reservoir into place today and appreciate there was a lot of negotiating with the puc to ensure the drawdown of the fund would happen over a course of time as we're
depositing more open space reserves into the acquisition funds. one last thing, as land become more eks pensive here in san francisco and the parts that are developing, i want to make sure that our funds are enough to cover the cost of land acquisition to ensure that there is open space in areas that are becoming more dense and also to figure out how we as a city can ensure that it's not going to be neighborhoods that have the funding capacity, that has the ability to fund raise and have existing neighborhood infrastructures to support acquisition. there are neighborhoods -- i know this discussion came up a lot about varying different schools and ptas and their anlt to fund raise for their school and it was a discussion we have at the board of education. i hope we can have that conversation here, particularly in low income neighborhoods. the tenderloin could be an example.
how can we make sure that we're able to make up for the fact that these residents may not be able to fund raise and how can we support secure inging those sites when the neighborhoods don't have is that type of capacity. i want to support this today. in acknowledgment of the work that i feel that supervisor farrell's office has done over the last three years and making the best, i think of a situation that's before us. i would have like today have seen some development. i think how uzing will continue to be in need on any of our surplus property and i think that's another thread of conversation we can have otherwise, but acknowledging we're at the point we're at today with the site, i will be voting yes for this. >> thank you. president chiu. >> i want to lend my voice as a cosponsor on this project and mention that while this is a
project that's often viewed as a district 2 project, we're honor and my district 1 is actually two blocks away from this site and as supervisor kim just acknowledged our neighborhoods have the least amount of open space and are the densest set of neighborhoods outside of manhattan. with that context, i want to also just sthang all the community organizations that came together and had a vision over many years and did the hard work. i want to thank supervisor farrell for his leadership, as well as the members of the community that have agreed to support this, not just with your personal support, but also financial support. i believe when this project is done no one is going to regret the open space and park we're going to see. i know all of us, as we support this project, we are also equally committed to making sure that future projects